Nizzy wrote:-Mike Rupp isn't a scorer, but he came in here and put in 6-7 goals one season. You need SOME production from the 4th line guys.-This is why I was against the Adams signing because now you have 2 guys on the 4th line that just don't score, ever.

I don't understand this. The Pens led the league in goals for during the regular season. Why exactly do we need more goals?

When your top two lines get shut down as they did against boston, it is nice to have two other capable lines that can pot an occasional goal. With the scoring in that series being so low, one goal from the 4th line could have changed the series. Looking at Chicago for example, you have guys like Shaw and Krueger and even Saad when he was not playing on the top two lines all who have the ability to score a goal. Our third/fourth liner with that ability was dealt to san jose this summer. Guys like glass who have a one-dimensional role do not last long. TK hit everything just as glass does... but he also had the ability to score a goal. Guys like Adams and glass should be replaced with younger WBS guys who have the ability to score some goals too.

When your top 2 lines don't produce like they did in Boston, it's doesnt matter who is on your 3rd and 4th line, it's time to throw in the towel.

Nizzy wrote:-Mike Rupp isn't a scorer, but he came in here and put in 6-7 goals one season. You need SOME production from the 4th line guys.-This is why I was against the Adams signing because now you have 2 guys on the 4th line that just don't score, ever.

I don't understand this. The Pens led the league in goals for during the regular season. Why exactly do we need more goals?

When your top two lines get shut down as they did against boston, it is nice to have two other capable lines that can pot an occasional goal. With the scoring in that series being so low, one goal from the 4th line could have changed the series. Looking at Chicago for example, you have guys like Shaw and Krueger and even Saad when he was not playing on the top two lines all who have the ability to score a goal. Our third/fourth liner with that ability was dealt to san jose this summer. Guys like glass who have a one-dimensional role do not last long. TK hit everything just as glass does... but he also had the ability to score a goal. Guys like Adams and glass should be replaced with younger WBS guys who have the ability to score some goals too.

When your top 2 lines don't produce like they did in Boston, it's doesnt matter who is on your 3rd and 4th line, it's time to throw in the towel.

Over the course of a series, yes, you're right. But all it takes is 1 goal. 1 goal in game 1 before the collapse in the 3rd, and the complexion of the series gets totally turned around. The Pens lost their confidence in Game 1, and by the time they got back to doing the little things in game 3, it was too late.

Having that depth is crucial. Boston put everything they had into shutting the door on the top 2 lines in game 1, and they could sit back and take a breather when the bottom 2 lines were out there. Hockey is a game of momentum. If half your lines can't establish any, you're not going to get very far, no matter how talented your top 2 lines are.

JoseCuervo wrote:So, yes? We need three scoring lines? Looks like the problem is solved.

I guess I see it differently and it was my problem with the Pens in general during the playoffs. It's not about a scoring line or checking line it's about having 12 guys that can contribute to the offense and that doesn't mean goals. It could mean cycle and puck possession and wearing team downs. It could mean dump and chase with a punishing forecheck. It could mean speed simply to keep the other teams honest. It could mean coming in waves after the other team that tires them over a series.

The problem in my eyes was other than Cooke our bottom 6 didn't do any of that. And they look worse, much worse as a group right now. Now I understand Sutter took a major defensive role in the playoffs so I am not singling him out in that sense. And sure part of it could be coaching. But this group now is shaping up to be pretty awful.

As I said on the previous page due to cap restraints I'm not sure how you fix it without dumping a higher salary for no NHL talent back. Trading Nisky seems to be a necessity right now not a luxury anyways, to keep 23 guys and some space (and correct me if I'm wrong) we basically have to just ship him out to become compliant.

Now, that's not to say that Sutter would necessarily be our fourth line center in the traditional sense. Too often, myself included, we get mixed up in the old "top two lines are offense, third line is defense, fourth line is physical/energy". That's in the book, but at the bottom of the page there's a take home activity that says, "experiment with your own line structure with a friend! This is just the recommended, traditional way "

I'm not saying that's where we're going, but people get locked into these mindsets as if they cannot change. We're not line-matchers, we're situational matchers. Sutter might still push 15 ES minutes. He might only get 10 if we're owning the puck anyway and not icing it or getting hemmed in our own end.

And no one necessarily has to be assigned that role...the response to this shouldn't be, "we didn't bring Sutter in to be our 4th line center" and we didn't and that's not even what that lineup really says above. The game is too fluid for that. We're a situational match team, so we'll match to the situation. If we're playing a team that likes to play fast and loose, like Calgary these days, like Colorado will be...hell, we can run and gun with anyone and probably bury them. Sutter and his crew will get 8, 10, 11 ES minutes that night maybe.

When we're playing a team that has a big offensive line, but plays kind of slower game but we need to respect that top line a little more than normal as they're hemming us in our own end then you can make a five-man unit that neutralizes it. Glass-Sutter-Vitale/Adams with Orpik-Martin on D as a five-man unit, like the old Soviet teams used to do. Ok, but now, this is becoming a 15, 16, 17 ES minute situation for Sutter, but he's kept the big line off the board and we trust 87's crew and 71's crew to own the puck against their weaker stuff.

There's lots to consider. I don't always love HCDB, but he can put his creativity to the test here with this roster...there are many different ways to go. As long as it's fundamentally on point (i.e. not repeated stretch passes into a layered defense for 200 some odd minutes), we have the roster still.

I think it would be a mistake to get rid of Niskanen for an upgraded 3rd line winger. I don't feel that great about the bottom 6 but it's a long season. You need that defensive depth.

Letang ScuderiMartin OrpikNiskanen DespresBortuzzo

I'm just not sure why Craig Adams got a 2nd year. 4th liners are a dime a dozen, and I think he will start to slow down more and more. I just hate this "have to keep 1 guy for the PK"...its not needed.

Honestly I'm fine with dumping anyone that's a playoff liability, and I think Nisky is. Just seems like he's 'guessing' tooo much. Maybe another year in the system he gets it and is more assertive? Doubt it.

Adams? Solid guy all around, on ice, practice, lockerroom. I would prefer my PK have better lateral quickness, definitely, but when I have someone that makes good decisions and is solid, I don't dump that without a specific replacement.

I think it would be a mistake to get rid of Niskanen for an upgraded 3rd line winger. I don't feel that great about the bottom 6 but it's a long season. You need that defensive depth.

Letang ScuderiMartin OrpikNiskanen DespresBortuzzo

I'm just not sure why Craig Adams got a 2nd year. 4th liners are a dime a dozen, and I think he will start to slow down more and more. I just hate this "have to keep 1 guy for the PK"...its not needed.

Not disagreeing with your general idea but is that even possible? Right now someone has to go and that person has to have a decent salary.

A higher salary even if Burtuzzo is signed.

I only go by capgeek so if we want 23 bodies with a bit of cap room for call upsor a decent amount for any deadline deals someone has to go and it would have to be Nisky or maybe Jussi although not sure his salary is high enough.

If there are folks with more knowledge of what we can do to shave a few dollars I am all ears.

If Nisky is traded and that is all this is our team from start to finish barring a major blockbuster type deal.

I don't see Shero selling out again this year in terms of moves. At some point trading prospects/picks will hurt a team and in a year when the cap is the lowest it can go I don't see Shero making any big moves.

If there are folks with more knowledge of what we can do to shave a few dollars I am all ears.

Honestly I think the answer is to trade MAF. That instantly frees up five million, and you rid yourself of a goalie that the organization did not trust to finish out round 1 of the playoffs, start or play at all in round 2 of the playoffs, and even give a sniff at the net for round 3 of the playoffs even when your team was down 3 games to none. To me, the organization has lost all faith in the guy and I see no reason to keep him around at 5 million a year with that in mind.

If there are folks with more knowledge of what we can do to shave a few dollars I am all ears.

Honestly I think the answer is to trade MAF. That instantly frees up five million, and you rid yourself of a goalie that the organization did not trust to finish out round 1 of the playoffs, start or play at all in round 2 of the playoffs, and even give a sniff at the net for round 3 of the playoffs even when your team was down 3 games to none. To me, the organization has lost all faith in the guy and I see no reason to keep him around at 5 million a year with that in mind.

This is incredibly shortsighted. Do you honestly believe open cap space is more valuable than Fleury at this point? You're not going to recoup much for him and you have no clear, long term plan to replace him. And please don't mention Eric Hartzel or Tristen Jarry.

If there are folks with more knowledge of what we can do to shave a few dollars I am all ears.

Honestly I think the answer is to trade MAF. That instantly frees up five million, and you rid yourself of a goalie that the organization did not trust to finish out round 1 of the playoffs, start or play at all in round 2 of the playoffs, and even give a sniff at the net for round 3 of the playoffs even when your team was down 3 games to none. To me, the organization has lost all faith in the guy and I see no reason to keep him around at 5 million a year with that in mind.

This is incredibly shortsighted. Do you honestly believe open cap space is more valuable than Fleury at this point? You're not going to recoup much for him and you have no clear, long term plan to replace him. And please don't mention Eric Hartzel or Tristen Jarry.

If they extended Bylsma and his assistants after playoff failures and meltdowns, they're certainly not trading Fleury, even if he's a headcase that hasn't played well for the last 4 playoff years.

It almost seems like the Country Club atmosphere might be coming back. I wish there was a replacement for Fleury out there, but at the time, there really isn't. He's our best option right now, and probably on his last leg. I wouldn't blame Shero for going back to him this year, but it certainly needs to be addressed if he doesn't play with at least the maturity or brain of a 16 year old this year.

There is no feasible Fleury replacement. Certainly not Vokoun in a full year, and nobody in the pipeline is ready. Fleury should get one more crack, this is his year to shape up or ship out. The potential is completely there.